Subject: [Pppext] I-D Action: draft-ietf-pppext-trill-protocol-04.txt

From: [email-masked]
Date: Mon, 09 May 2011 09:02:27 -0700

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Point-to-Point Protocol Extensions Working Group of the IETF.

	Title           : PPP TRILL Protocol Control Protocol
	Author(s)       : James Carlson
	Filename        : draft-ietf-pppext-trill-protocol-04.txt
	Pages           : 7
	Date            : 2011-05-09

   The Point-to-Point Protocol (PPP) defines a Link Control Protocol
   (LCP) and a method for negotiating the use of multi-protocol traffic
   over point-to-point links.  This document describes PPP support for
   Transparent Interconnection of Lots of Links (TRILL) Protocol,
   allowing direct communication between Routing Bridges (RBridges) via
   PPP links.

A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-pppext-trill-protocol-04.txt

Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/

This Internet-Draft can be retrieved at:
ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-pppext-trill-protocol-04.txt

---

From: James Carlson <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 09 May 2011 12:14:12 -0400

> 	Filename        : draft-ietf-pppext-trill-protocol-04.txt

In this new version, I've removed stray footnote references from the
stand-alone Abstract section and added a bit of detail to the Security
Considerations -- specifically citing at least a few of the protocols
involved.  There's a slippery slope here, in that I could easily end up
describing all the possible deployment scenarios and incorporating
essentially all of rfc-index.txt by reference, but I hope I've struck a
reasonable balance.

I've left the system ID issue as an informative reference.  No matter
how I read this PPP document, providing system IDs is not a requirement
for implementing this protocol.  It _might_ be a requirement for IS-IS
implementations.  But the protocol described here isn't IS-IS.

So, with that, I'm starting up the last call period again.  Please
respond by May 23rd, 2011, if you have any comments.  After that date,
I'll ask the IESG to consider publishing.

-- 
James Carlson         42.703N 71.076W         <[email-masked]>

---

From: William Allen Simpson <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 09 May 2011 12:27:53 -0400

It seems to be a small improvement on the security details.  What the
status of the related TRILL drafts?  Are we behind?

---

From: James Carlson <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 09 May 2011 14:05:53 -0400

William Allen Simpson wrote:
> It seems to be a small improvement on the security details.

Thanks.

>  What the

I'm not sure I know what you mean, but the rest of them are awaiting
publication now:

http://www.rfc-editor.org/cluster_info.php?cid=C74

So, yes, this draft is behind the other TRILL documents, but if we get
to the end of the last call successfully this time, it won't be by much.

---

From: William Allen Simpson <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 10 May 2011 01:00:24 -0400

> essentially all of rfc-index.txt by reference, but I hope I've struck a
Cynical overstatement.  I don't understand why PPP encryption and L2TP
are mentioned without providing a reference, but let's just agree to
disagree and let the RFC Editor sort it out.

> implementations.  But the protocol described here isn't IS-IS.
Again, I've already agreed to disagree on the previous drafts.  It's OK,
as long as it references the proposed solution.

> I'll ask the IESG to consider publishing.
Ship it!  The IESG consideration speed is so slow these days that it's
best to get it into the queue, so that they can have their say.

Ah well, now I'm being cynical.

---

From: William Allen Simpson <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 10 May 2011 01:01:15 -0400

> to the end of the last call successfully this time, it won't be by much.
Aha!  I didn't know about clusters.  Thanks!

---

From: Donald Eastlake <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 13 May 2011 00:27:06 -0400

I've reviewed the new version and think it is fine.

Thanks,
Donald
=============================
 Donald E. Eastlake 3rd   +1-508-333-2270 (cell)
 155 Beaver Street
 Milford, MA 01757 USA
 [email-masked]

On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 12:14 PM, James Carlson <[email-masked]> wrote:
> _______________________________________________
> Pppext mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pppext
>

---

From: Jon Hudson <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 19 May 2011 12:48:11 -0700

Reviewed latest 04 version

Happy, no issues.

Jon

On May 13, 2011, at 10:18 AM, Donald Eastlake <[email-masked]> wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> TRILL participant may be interested in the below Last Call in the
> PPPEXT Working Group.
> 
> Thanks,
> Donald
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: James Carlson <[email-masked]>
> Date: Mon, May 9, 2011 at 12:14 PM
> Subject: [Pppext] Working group last call for PPP TRILL [was I-D
> Action: draft-ietf-pppext-trill-protocol-04.txt]
> To: PPP Extensions <[email-masked]>
> 
> 
> rbridge mailing list
> [email-masked]
> http://mailman.postel.org/mailman/listinfo/rbridge

---

From: Yizhou Li <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 23 May 2011 13:52:31 +0800

I am ok with the latest version.

Yizhou

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On
Behalf Of Donald Eastlake
Sent: Saturday, May 14, 2011 1:18 AM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [rbridge] Fwd: [Pppext] Working group last call for PPP TRILL [was
I-D Action: draft-ietf-pppext-trill-protocol-04.txt]

Hi,

Thanks,
Donald

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: James Carlson <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, May 9, 2011 at 12:14 PM
Subject: [Pppext] Working group last call for PPP TRILL [was I-D
Action: draft-ietf-pppext-trill-protocol-04.txt]
To: PPP Extensions <[email-masked]>

[email-masked] wrote:
> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts
directories. This draft is a work item of the Point-to-Point Protocol
Extensions Working Group of the IETF.